Justices side with Colorado baker on same-sex wedding cake

Justices side with Colorado baker on same-sex wedding cake

Justices side with Colorado baker on same-sex wedding cake

For example, one commissioner said during a public hearing that using freedom of religion to justify discrimination "is one of the most despicable pieces of rhetoric that people can use".

Clark has since apologised for his remarks, after they were widely reported, posting a statement on his Facebook page. Those bakers would not bake the cake as requested and were not sanctioned by the state Civil Rights Commission. Businesses should not be able to discriminate exclusively based on race, sex, national origin, age, or handicap. I wouldn't be surprised if blue states began writing such bills, but the concurrence could also give red states their own blueprint for how to carve out religious liberty exemptions.

Freedom of religion and religion has been used to justify all kinds of discrimination throughout history, whether it be slavery, whether it be the holocaust, whether it be-I mean, we-we can list hundreds of situations where freedom of religion has been used to justify discrimination.

The Masterpiece case goes back to an incident in 2012 when Phillips refused to create a wedding cake to celebrate the marriage of two men in MA. "When a couple contacts a bakery for a wedding cake, the product they are seeking is a cake celebrating their wedding-not a cake celebrating heterosexual weddings or same-sex weddings-and that is the service Craig and Mullins were denied", Ginsburg writes. He pointed to the discrimination complaints in multiple states, some of which were filed after couples had easily found other bakers to make their cake, as evidence of the LGBT's lobby to reject pluralism.

The Supreme Court's punt on the broader issue of whether a business can invoke religious objections in order to refuse service assures that the subject will remain a major American debate. The narrow opinion largely shies away from setting a wider precedent of what discrimination is permissible in the name of religious freedom, though it did find that the actions of the CCRC were discriminatory.

The ruling's opinion honed in on the argument of free speech and religious neutrality, saying the baker's refusal was based on "sincere religious beliefs and convictions" and when the Colorado Civil Rights Commission considered this case, the court said, "it did not do so with the religious neutrality that the Constitution requires". The government is not allowed to make normative judgments about the legitimacy of a person's religious beliefs.

During oral argument on the Masterpiece Cake case, Justice Breyer raised the concern that drafting an opinion in favor of the baker had the potential to "undermine every civil rights law since year 2". Rather, he said it was about treating everyone equally under the law.

Paris rain halts Rafael Nadal's momentum with Diego Schwartzman a set up
Nadal returned to the court midway through serving to level the match after bad weather ended play early on Wednesday evening. Nadal , in the hunt for an 11th French Open title, trails 11th seed Schwartzman 6-4, 3-5.

"The outcome of cases like this in other circumstances must await further elaboration in the courts, all in the context of recognizing that these disputes must be resolved with tolerance, without undue disrespect to honest religious beliefs, and without subjecting gay persons to indignities when they seek goods and services in an open market", Kennedy said. Colorado state courts upheld the determination.

IN a much-anticipated decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled this week in a case centered on a Colorado baker's choice not to make a custom cake for a gay wedding.

The view that marriage is the union of a man and a woman, Kennedy wrote in that ruling, "has been held-and continues to be held-in good faith by reasonable and honest people here and throughout the world". This will encourage all sorts of mischief by well-funded anti-LGBTQ organizations who want to create exceptions to nondiscrimination laws.

"The Oregon case, I don't think the majority decision in Masterpiece will end up deciding the Oregon case", Oleske said. "The commission's hostility was inconsistent with the First Amendment's guarantee that our laws be applied in a manner that is neutral toward religion", he wrote.

"SCOTUS has become an accomplice in the right's strategy to hollow out one of its finest achievements, the right to equal marriage, and create what Justice Ginsberg memorably termed 'skim milk marriages'". Pretty sure that's not narrowly.

"The Supreme Court may have dodged the issue for now, but it will not be able to avoid it forever", said JoLynn Markison, an attorney with Dorsey & Whitney in Minneapolis.

Related news

[an error occurred while processing the directive]